Jump to content

Does it count?


Recommended Posts

Hello all!

 

I'm pretty new to geocaching and I love it! But I have quite a lot of questions about the caches..

 

My first on is about a cach in Berlin:

 

I was in Berlin as a tourist and between a museum and another one I went geocaching a little bit. I found a geocach, but it was ON a tree and I couldn't reach it to write my name!

 

I have a bitter taste now that I'm back in UK, as I couldn't actually REACH and OPEN the little box and this is a shame, because it was THERE, I could SEE the little metal shining box! :(

 

I haven't log the "found it" on the website, as I was wondering if this count as a "found it" or not..

 

Thanks for your help and time!

Link to comment

I'm am sure someone will / jump all over you so I'll get in before they can...

 

Short answer and pretty much the standard response is no. Unless the log was signed (part of the game "rules"). The requirement to climb the tree was probably intentioral and so technically the cache was not found. Some people claim a fi d when they just see the cache or arrive and do not fund it but feel they shold still get the find. That is considered bad form.

Edited by doc73
Link to comment

Hello all!

 

I'm pretty new to geocaching and I love it! But I have quite a lot of questions about the caches..

 

My first on is about a cach in Berlin:

 

I was in Berlin as a tourist and between a museum and another one I went geocaching a little bit. I found a geocach, but it was ON a tree and I couldn't reach it to write my name!

 

I have a bitter taste now that I'm back in UK, as I couldn't actually REACH and OPEN the little box and this is a shame, because it was THERE, I could SEE the little metal shining box! :(

 

I haven't log the "found it" on the website, as I was wondering if this count as a "found it" or not..

 

Thanks for your help and time!

 

Did the cache write-up say anything about it being a challenge to reach, and return, the cache to sign the log?

 

Was the D/T rating more than a 1.0/1.5?

 

If I was that cache owner, and you didn't sign the log, then it would not count as a "find" as far as I was concerned.

 

As a cache hunter, if I can't reach the cache, sign the log, and return the cache to its proper location, then I wouldn't consider it a "find" and I definitely wouldn't log it as such.

 

Not all caches are meant to be "found" by all people. Tree-climbing, rock-scaling, scuba-diving...all kinds of things are out of my league.

 

Just because I "saw" a cache does not mean the same as "finding" it to me.

 

What you do is up to you. What the cache owner thinks of it is up to him/her.

 

 

B.

Link to comment

 

I was in Berlin as a tourist and between a museum and another one I went geocaching a little bit. I found a geocach, but it was ON a tree and I couldn't reach it to write my name!

 

Curious...what was the Terrain rating? Did they use the Tree-climbing attribute?

Link to comment

We would have thousands and thousands of finds if we logged everything that we only "saw", or drove past, or were in the vague area of the cache location.

 

Not much point in playing the game if all you need to do is get some coordinates, and not actually retrieve the cache, sign the log, and return the cache to its proper hiding spot.

 

Some people say "play the game your way". That's lame and extraordinarily self-centred, but if that makes people happy, then so be it.

 

 

B.

Edited by Pup Patrol
Link to comment
I couldn't actually REACH and OPEN the little box and this is a shame, because it was THERE, I could SEE the little metal shining box! :(

 

I haven't log the "found it" on the website, as I was wondering if this count as a "found it" or not..

 

Thanks for your help and time!

I've seen a few of those kinds of caches. One was between two boards of an old billboard, and 20 feet up, through rusty metal beams, and a gap of about 12" of space to climb (um, I think I'd get stuck in there :anicute:, plus I was in clothes I didn't need to get rust on), and I saw the container just fine at the top.

 

Usually there's some clue in the cache description that the container requires extra work to grab it, and I expect I might not be able to access it. I've logged a DNF (it's a good idea to at least make some log) if I couldn't open it. Part of the fun is, some caches take extra effort or special items, or require bringing a family member who can climb a tree, or whatever. If it's a "D1/T1" cache, it shouldn't be out of reach for most people. If it's got high Difficulty and Terrain ratings, that can mean another trip or a better plan, before it can be logged as "Found". You can't get'em all, just like Pokémon, but the opposite. :laughing:

 

At one cache, I grabbed the container just fine, but couldn't open the tube (a PVC pipe). "DNF".

 

If at any cache that had an unexpected issue, the Cache Owner then wrote to me and suggested I should log a "Found It", I might consider that. Otherwise, part of the challenge is getting the container and signing the log. But I log them all, anyway. "DNF" stories can be cool, too.

 

Lots of logs on my caches are "Found It, didn't sign" (for various reasons), and several times, I'd prefer they'd have made a little extra effort to sign the log, or don't say they found it. Because there are cases where I can't tell if they were at the correct cache, and therefore can't tell in advance if there's a problem at my cache.

Edited by kunarion
Link to comment

I have a bitter taste now that I'm back in UK, as I couldn't actually REACH and OPEN the little box and this is a shame, because it was THERE, I could SEE the little metal shining box! :(

Please don't feel bad. You didn't sign the log. Big deal. You have a fun story. I hope you enjoyed visiting the location. Being able to claim a find on-line is really a very minor thing about geocaching, so you shouldn't get hung up about it. Of course it makes sense for you to feel disappointed about it, maybe even wished you'd spent time on another cache, but, no matter why you can't get a cache, think of it as one less positive thing about the adventure, not a negative that wipes out everything else you enjoyed about it.

Link to comment

I have a bitter taste now that I'm back in UK, as I couldn't actually REACH and OPEN the little box and this is a shame, because it was THERE, I could SEE the little metal shining box! :(

Please don't feel bad. You didn't sign the log. Big deal. You have a fun story. I hope you enjoyed visiting the location. Being able to claim a find on-line is really a very minor thing about geocaching, so you shouldn't get hung up about it. Of course it makes sense for you to feel disappointed about it, maybe even wished you'd spent time on another cache, but, no matter why you can't get a cache, think of it as one less positive thing about the adventure, not a negative that wipes out everything else you enjoyed about it.

+1

Link to comment

I'm am sure someone will / jump all over you so I'll get in before they can...

 

Thereby jumping all over everybody else here before they even had a chance to respond.

 

Talk about leading by example :blink:

 

No, not everyone, very few actually. There are just a few who seem to come and degrade the very new cacher instead of welcoming them. Make them feel stupid or unwelcome instead of helping.

Edited by doc73
Link to comment

I'm am sure someone will / jump all over you so I'll get in before they can...

 

Thereby jumping all over everybody else here before they even had a chance to respond.

 

Talk about leading by example :blink:

 

No, not everyone, very few actually. There are just a few who seem to come and degrade the very new cacher instead of welcoming them. Make them feel stupid or unwelcome I stead of helping.

 

Your slur was indiscriminate and thus you tarred everyone with the same brush.

Link to comment

I'm am sure someone will / jump all over you so I'll get in before they can...

Really?

So I guess this thread ends at your post...

 

Only if your plan was to jump on him and not actually have a useful response to help him.

 

OP: I would not worry about it to much. I travel a lot and would love to made more finds than I did. It's a game, fun, not something to be upset over. Might give you some thing to re-visit if you are back in the neighborhood.

Edited by doc73
Link to comment

I'm am sure someone will / jump all over you so I'll get in before they can...

Really?

So I guess this thread ends at your post...

 

Only if your plan was to jump on him and not actually have a useful response to help him.

 

OP: I would not worry about it to much. I travel a lot and would love to made more finds than I did. It's a game, fun, not something to be upset over. Might give you some thing to re-visit if you are back in the neighborhood.

 

You miss the real irony: you did what you accuse others of doing. A different object but the same action.

Link to comment

I'm am sure someone will / jump all over you so I'll get in before they can...

 

Short answer and pretty much the standard response is no. Unless the log was signed (part of the game "rules"). The requirement to climb the tree was probably intentioral and so technically the cache was not found. Some people claim a fi d when they just see the cache or arrive and do not fund it but feel they shold still get the find. That is considered bad form.

Ok. My turn to jump.

 

Don't know what you mean by "part of the game 'rules'". There is no rule per se that you must sign the log in order to log a find online. There are 'rules' allowing cache owners to delete online found logs that apear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic, or not within stated requirements. Groundspeak has made it clear that the physical log in the cache may play a role in deciding if an online log is bogus. When they may a decision to nullify the practice of have additional requirments for posting on online log, they indicated that physical caches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed. That simply meant that a cache owner couldn't demand additional requirements beyond signing the log (for example, proof that you climbed the tree).

 

The OP is free to log a find on the cache, but the cache owner is just as free to delete the log. Given the cache description and terrain rating, there is a good chance that the owner would delete the log. I think the OP, like many who ask this question, already knew the answer. Most people will understand that if a cache owner has hidden a cache that involves a physical or mental challenge to sign the log, they probably intend this challenge as part of the cache.

 

The problem is in the nature of the online log. It has become the "goal" in the game. It is not enought anymore to find caches and possible to sign the physical log. Our "reward" is the smiley we get when you log the find online. So we have people looking for some rationale to log "found" online, even whey they know they did complete the cache as a cache owner intended. Cleary if we were to stop treating the online log as the reward, it would make little difference what people logged as found. If someone want to play a game when "found" mean you can see the cache, instead of whether you signed a piece of paper, it would make no difference. Some people would log the cache without climbing the tree while others would climbe trees and only log what they signed. It is only whne the online "found" log becomes the "Woohoo! I got another smiley" (WIGAS) log, that we have controversies and the need to jump on people in the forum.

Link to comment

I'm am sure someone will / jump all over you so I'll get in before they can...

 

Thereby jumping all over everybody else here before they even had a chance to respond.

 

Talk about leading by example :blink:

 

No, not everyone, very few actually. There are just a few who seem to come and degrade the very new cacher instead of welcoming them. Make them feel stupid or unwelcome I stead of helping.

 

Your slur was indiscriminate and thus you tarred everyone with the same brush.

 

Not a slur if it has a factual backing from my own viewpoint and evidence from a small number (2) of persons that only ever seem to post negative or condescending remarks. They in particular have posted in numerous is recent threads in this manor so it is not hard to find if you care enough. But that's ok, be offended, I do not care. Continue to be the person I warned the OP about.. Might be 3 now instead of 2. Funny.... Now back to the guy's question instead of pooing it up with banter. I am moving on, and will not comment further On this particular drift from the OP topic, my point was made and proven.

 

Edit to change nemesis to numerous.. darn auto correct...

Edited by doc73
Link to comment

Thanks for your reply guys!

 

The cache description said "you need some climbing skills to log it" and terrain was 4/5, but I didn't imagine it was too hard!

 

No log then. I managed other caches in Berlin, so I'm happy in this way :)

 

Thanks again!

For the future, if the terrain rating is a 5, expect it to be very hard. To me, I would guess that the terrain rating is a little over done. I expect a 5 terrain to be a major mountain climb with significant danger. A quick tree climb to me is more like a 3.5 terrain

Link to comment

I'm am sure someone will / jump all over you so I'll get in before they can...

 

Thereby jumping all over everybody else here before they even had a chance to respond.

 

Talk about leading by example :blink:

 

No, not everyone, very few actually. There are just a few who seem to come and degrade the very new cacher instead of welcoming them. Make them feel stupid or unwelcome I stead of helping.

 

Your slur was indiscriminate and thus you tarred everyone with the same brush.

 

Not a slur if it has a factual backing from my own viewpoint and evidence from a small number (2) of persons that only ever seem to post negative or condescending remarks. They in particular have posted in nemesis recent threads in this manor so it is not hard to find if you care enough. But that's ok, be offended, I do not care. Continue to be the person I warned the OP about.. Might be 3 now instead of 2. Funny.... Now back to the guy's question instead of pooing it up with banter. I am moving on, and will not comment further On this topic, my point was made and proven.

 

FWIW I think doc73 has a point, there are a number of contributors to the forums who are often downright obnoxious and can make newcomers feel unwelcome. I have no doubt that if he hadn't made this point one or more of them would have come and said something nasty - who knows they may still do, there's plenty of time.

Link to comment

Ok so I lied.. But I think it actually relates to the OP's questions.. To Tozanboku (sorry if misspelled on a small screen phone)

 

To answer the rules part. That is why they are in quotes. No set rule (by GS) but if it is generally felt that it is not appropriate to find without signing then to me that is an unwritten rule because it is the generally accepted manor in which the game is played. If what you say is correct, which it is, then he should just sign the log and let the CO figure it out.. It is a game after all and it's not like he working on winning a prize or anything so what would it matter. But by the most players account it would be bad form, cheating, dishonest, whatever the other cachers feelings would be. Not my feelings, maybe or maybe so, but theirs from what I've witnessed from responses from other persons here.

Edited by doc73
Link to comment

Does it count? That's between you and the cache owner. The end.

 

Your right, sums that right up quick.. email the CO, ask... Since really our feelings and thoughts are not his so we only speculate and pull from our own experience, knowledge and feelings.

Link to comment

I'm am sure someone will / jump all over you so I'll get in before they can...

 

Thereby jumping all over everybody else here before they even had a chance to respond.

 

Talk about leading by example :blink:

 

So four people, including you, jump onto doc73 instead. :rolleyes:

 

He's not prejudging anyone, as historically that what happens in here with this type of question.

Link to comment

I'm am sure someone will / jump all over you so I'll get in before they can...

 

Thereby jumping all over everybody else here before they even had a chance to respond.

 

Talk about leading by example :blink:

 

So four people, including you, jump onto doc73 instead. :rolleyes:

 

He's not prejudging anyone, as historically that what happens in here with this type of question.

 

Ah, do not bait / satisfy them.. I'll take the ripping, no need to get yourself wrapped up in it as well. I am not upset of shamed in any way. But, thank you.

 

BTW had to laugh at the Germany Comment!!! LOL!!!

Edited by doc73
Link to comment

I'm am sure someone will / jump all over you so I'll get in before they can...

 

Thereby jumping all over everybody else here before they even had a chance to respond.

 

Talk about leading by example :blink:

 

So four people, including you, jump onto doc73 instead. :rolleyes:

 

He's not prejudging anyone, as historically that what happens in here with this type of question.

 

I'm am sure someone will / jump all over you so I'll get in before they can...

 

Predicts a future event that may or may not arise based on a limited view of historical data and states that outcome as a certainty.

 

Looks like prejudging to me.

 

You're at liberty to disagree of course - although so far I'm happy to see that the prediction hasn't come true :P

Link to comment

Two thoughts here:

 

One, you can play the game however you like. If you want to log the find, you can, but the owner is fully within his rights to delete said log if he chooses, as you technically did not meet the challenge that he put forth (to climb the tree). I personally would not log the find, but others may feel differently.

 

Second, some owners may not be that concerned about it and may let the find stand. I had one cache at an old abandoned church that I logged a DNF on, and the owner e-mailed me to tell me that he really just wanted to bring people to this interesting location and if I wanted to log it as found he wouldn't mind. I thanked him for that but no, I left it as a DNF because that's the way I choose to play.

 

Besides, some of my funniest logs and most memorable cache hunts were the ones I didn't find ?

Link to comment

Thanks for your reply guys!

 

The cache description said "you need some climbing skills to log it" and terrain was 4/5, but I didn't imagine it was too hard!

 

No log then. I managed other caches in Berlin, so I'm happy in this way :)

 

Thanks again!

Yeh you got your first DNF, be sure and log it then move on have fun and welcome to Geocaching. :D

Link to comment

Thanks for your reply guys!

 

The cache description said "you need some climbing skills to log it" and terrain was 4/5, but I didn't imagine it was too hard!

 

No log then. I managed other caches in Berlin, so I'm happy in this way :)

 

Thanks again!

 

A 4/5 should be very difficult. A warning that you need climbing skills is a good move on the cache owner's part. Kudos to him/her for being upfront about the cache.

 

Here's the Difficulty/Terrain Rating Guide:

 

Help Center → Hiding a Geocache → Review Process: Hiding a Geocache

1.14. Ratings for Difficulty and Terrain (D/T)

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=82

 

Geocache Rating System

http://www.geocaching.com/hide/rate.aspx

 

 

B.

Link to comment

I'm am sure someone will / jump all over you so I'll get in before they can...

 

Thereby jumping all over everybody else here before they even had a chance to respond.

 

Talk about leading by example :blink:

 

So four people, including you, jump onto doc73 instead. :rolleyes:

 

He's not prejudging anyone, as historically that what happens in here with this type of question.

 

I'm am sure someone will / jump all over you so I'll get in before they can...

 

Predicts a future event that may or may not arise based on a limited view of historical data and states that outcome as a certainty.

 

Looks like prejudging to me.

 

You're at liberty to disagree of course - although so far I'm happy to see that the prediction hasn't come true :P

 

It sure seems to be an accurate prediction after seeing everyone jump on him! :D

Link to comment

Log it and move on. Most CO dont double check thier logs. Only controlling CO that got too much time on thier hands do double check people logs.

Really?

My other 2/3rds checks when the online log just doesn't seem right on her "5" hide.

She believes that's being fair to the folks who actually did it.

I don't find her reasoning "controlling" at all.

Link to comment

Log it and move on. Most CO dont double check thier logs. Only controlling CO that got too much time on their hands do double check people logs.

I do not think I am over controlling with my caches but if I think somethings wrong I'll check it out. Otherwise, I find out when I do my maintenance checks. Not sure if it is acceptable or not... But, I would probably not delete their log. I'd probably leave it and just put a note on it from me saying the finder may have lied and not actually made the find due to the lack of the log signing. They can keep the smiley but at the risk of being publicly shamed... Them if they choose to remove their find I will remove the owner note. If they have a reason for the lack of the signature I'll give them time to re-visit and sign. I'll put the ball on them to admit the obvious. if they go back and sign we be good, note comes down... :ph34r:

Link to comment

I will agree with SwineFlew that it seems a bit of a controlling personality to worry over someone wanting to log a find when the had (in their view) a reasonable cause for not signing the log. No need to call someone a cheater or liar because they forgot a pen or because they were unable to climb the tree. Nor, as someone who would at least made an effort to sign, would I view it as "unfair" that a cache owner allowed a log to stand.

 

If the cache is in the tree, I imagine the cache owner thinks it would be fun to climb the tree to retrieve the cache. If someone didn't sign, they would have missed out on the full fun of that cache. I don't think that many cache owners are going to say that you've missed out on the fun because you didn't sign the log, but if they clearly intended to have some challenge in doing so, I think that doing that challenge is reward in itself.

 

Unfortunately, for too many people this has turned into the WIGAS points game. Too many cache owners believe that the points are the motivator and without them nobody would climb trees or solve field puzzle to open the cache. The abolishment of additional logging requirements remove a slew of silly rules that people had to "find" their caches. But in resulted in a poorly written guideline meant to give owners some guideance in what online logs they could delete, that only encourages some cache owners to find new ways to be controlling about their hides. If you hide caches that are fun, people will find them. If someone logs a find online without doing the "fun" stuff, they've missed out on the fun. You could post a note indicating that they've missed out, but there is no need to refer to people as cheaters or to worry that allowingl logs is unfair to the people who did do the fun part.

Link to comment

Log it and move on. Most CO dont double check thier logs. Only controlling CO that got too much time on thier hands do double check people logs.

 

Speaking of trolls...

 

You are mistaken. Cache owners who care double check physical logs, especially when the supposed finders post logs detailing the incorrect location where they supposedly found the cache.

 

Misleading and lying, that's not much help to the next finders, eh?

 

If you are going to lie through your teeth on a cache I own, you better believe I'm going to check the physical log, and delete your bogus, false find.

 

There's not much point in hiding caches if you are going to be an irresponsible, lazy cache owner.

 

Please don't mislead newbies with false blanket statements. If you are too lazy to properly maintain your caches and logs, then that's your personal opinion you've stated, not "fact".

 

 

B.

Edited by Pup Patrol
Link to comment

Thanks for your reply guys!

 

The cache description said "you need some climbing skills to log it" and terrain was 4/5, but I didn't imagine it was too hard!

 

No log then. I managed other caches in Berlin, so I'm happy in this way :)

 

Thanks again!

 

It sounds like it may have been mis-rated. If you can't walk to the base of the tree and see the cache, then the difficultly rating should be a 1.5 at most. A 5 terrain rating general means the it will require special skills or equipment to reach the cache. Chalk this one up to experience so in the future, so when you see a 5T cache rating you'll know it probably *is* going to be hard.

 

BTW, one of the most entertaining logs I've ever read involved a cache that was about 12 up in a tree (with no branches to climb it). In this case, climbing skills weren't necessary, but one needed a ladder or some other creative way to reach the cache. That particular log mention using a couple of lawn chairs and the unintended consequences of trying to use them in order to reach the cache.

 

 

Link to comment

Thanks for your reply guys!

 

The cache description said "you need some climbing skills to log it" and terrain was 4/5, but I didn't imagine it was too hard!

It sounds like it may have been mis-rated. If you can't walk to the base of the tree and see the cache, then the difficultly rating should be a 1.5 at most.

Do you mean "can walk to.." instead of "can't"?

 

I had initially read 4/5 as D/T, but thinking about it, the OP only mentioned terrain, so she might mean 4 out of 5? In any case, doesn't really matter to the original topic.

Link to comment

There's not much point in hiding caches if you are going to be an irresponsible, lazy cache owner.

That's a Canadian attitude if I ever heard one.

 

Frankly if people had fun looking for my cache I don't really care it they signed the log. If an online post is misleading, I may delete it, but most likely I would just add a note of my own.

 

Perhaps you had an actual experience with a bogus logger interfering with other people's ability to enjoy your cache. This is a rare occurance, and I think that it is still the case that most cache owners find no need to check logs or to doubt the word of the finder that they found the cache. I wouldn't resort to name calling because they do this.

 

I'm almost considerting reporting this post. I suspect the way this thread is going in the 'Getting Started' section it will be locked soon. I believe the OP got her answer and decided to do what she thinks is right. I try to avoid these discussions in the Getting Started session. As far as a newbie is concerned, just sign the log and don't meke it hard. But the comments that you're cheating if you don't or that you're a lazy cache owner if you don't delete are probably not the best way to introduce someone to this game.

Link to comment

That's a Canadian attitude if I ever heard one.

Okay, I have to ask: what's with the sudden use of "Canadian" to describe types of behaviour? Can you explain what you mean by "a Canadian attitude"? In the context of PP's post, it seems to just describe an attitude of responsibility, so I'm not sure why a specific nation is being singled out. Are we the only ones that feel that others should be responsible for their actions?

Link to comment

There's not much point in hiding caches if you are going to be an irresponsible, lazy cache owner.

That's a Canadian attitude if I ever heard one.

 

Frankly if people had fun looking for my cache I don't really care it they signed the log. If an online post is misleading, I may delete it, but most likely I would just add a note of my own.

 

Perhaps you had an actual experience with a bogus logger interfering with other people's ability to enjoy your cache. This is a rare occurance, and I think that it is still the case that most cache owners find no need to check logs or to doubt the word of the finder that they found the cache. I wouldn't resort to name calling because they do this.

 

I'm almost considerting reporting this post. I suspect the way this thread is going in the 'Getting Started' section it will be locked soon. I believe the OP got her answer and decided to do what she thinks is right. I try to avoid these discussions in the Getting Started session. As far as a newbie is concerned, just sign the log and don't meke it hard. But the comments that you're cheating if you don't or that you're a lazy cache owner if you don't delete are probably not the best way to introduce someone to this game.

 

Yes, the "found it" logs made it sound like we were irresponsible cache hiders, and the cache was in a location nowhere near where it actually was.

 

This isn't the "Getting Started" forum, so I'm not sure why you are bringing that up.

 

Someone puts a cache up a tree. They make note of this in the cache description. I don't know, I don't know what cache it is.

 

I walk past the cache. I look up at the tree and I see what I think might be the cache. I make no attempt to retrieve it.

 

Not sure how anyone could justify logging it as found, but if that makes them happy to do that, then so be it.

 

But they absolutely need to be aware that the cache owner is well within their rights to delete that "found it" log.

 

That's the way Groundspeak has set things up.

 

 

B.

Link to comment

That's a Canadian attitude if I ever heard one.

Okay, I have to ask: what's with the sudden use of "Canadian" to describe types of behaviour? Can you explain what you mean by "a Canadian attitude"? In the context of PP's post, it seems to just describe an attitude of responsibility, so I'm not sure why a specific nation is being singled out. Are we the only ones that feel that others should be responsible for their actions?

 

It started a while ago, I forget where/which thread, where people seem to be enjoying slamming narcissa for being Canadian.

 

I forget the whole deal. It's one of those forum things, like the old, tired "platinum member" joke.

 

It's not much help to newbies, either.

 

B.

Link to comment

That's a Canadian attitude if I ever heard one.

Okay, I have to ask: what's with the sudden use of "Canadian" to describe types of behaviour? Can you explain what you mean by "a Canadian attitude"? In the context of PP's post, it seems to just describe an attitude of responsibility, so I'm not sure why a specific nation is being singled out. Are we the only ones that feel that others should be responsible for their actions?

 

It started a while ago, I forget where/which thread, where people seem to be enjoying slamming narcissa for being Canadian.

 

I forget the whole deal. It's one of those forum things, like the old, tired "platinum member" joke.

 

It's not much help to newbies, either.

 

B.

 

It's fascinating that I am apparently the centre of this "joke" but I didn't even realize that. Awesome.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...